Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH][TRIVIAL] vl: coding style cleanups

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH][TRIVIAL] vl: coding style cleanups

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 05:04:29PM -0600, Jesse Larrew wrote:
> 
> Reformat the option parsing code in main() and various supporting functions
> to conform to the QEMU coding style.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Larrew <jlarrew@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  vl.c | 476 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 260 insertions(+), 216 deletions(-)

Please CC qemu-trivial@nongnu.org on trivial patches in the future.

There has been discussion about whitespace cleanups recently and it also
applies to this patch.  There is a cost to such patches - they require
code review, can clog up the git-blame(1) output, and make it hard for
stable branch or downstream maintainers to backport fixes.

I'm happy to take this patch but I hope people don't get too
trigger-happy because this isn't free.

Waiting a while longer to merge in case Blue Swirl or anyone else wants
to chime in.

Stefan

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH][TRIVIAL] vl: coding style cleanups

[Anthony Liguori]

Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 05:04:29PM -0600, Jesse Larrew wrote:
>> 
>> Reformat the option parsing code in main() and various supporting functions
>> to conform to the QEMU coding style.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jesse Larrew <jlarrew@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>  vl.c | 476 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 260 insertions(+), 216 deletions(-)
>
> Please CC qemu-trivial@nongnu.org on trivial patches in the future.
>
> There has been discussion about whitespace cleanups recently and it also
> applies to this patch.  There is a cost to such patches - they require
> code review, can clog up the git-blame(1) output, and make it hard for
> stable branch or downstream maintainers to backport fixes.
>
> I'm happy to take this patch but I hope people don't get too
> trigger-happy because this isn't free.
>
> Waiting a while longer to merge in case Blue Swirl or anyone else wants
> to chime in.

Before the patch:

total: 75 errors, 125 warnings, 4230 lines checked

After the patch:

total: 59 errors, 67 warnings, 4274 lines checked

This feels like unnecessary churn to me.  If the patch was taking vl.c
to 0 errors, I'd be more inclined to pay the cost.  But I don't want
there to be 3-4 patches that break blame just to get a single file into
compliance.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Stefan